Skip to main content

About this Show

The Communicators

News/Business. People who shape the digital future.

NETWORK

DURATION
00:30:00

RATING

SCANNED IN
San Francisco, CA, USA

SOURCE
Comcast Cable

TUNER
Channel 91 (627 MHz)

VIDEO CODEC
mpeg2video

AUDIO CODEC
ac3

PIXEL WIDTH
704

PIXEL HEIGHT
480

TOPIC FREQUENCY

Washington 4, Google 3, Sec 3, U.s. 2, Eliza Krigman 2, At&t 2, Smith 1, Hamed Karzai 1, Paul Wolfowitz 1, Robert Hale 1, Michael O'hanlon 1, Facebook 1, Mary Bono Mack 1, Lee Terry 1, Obama 1, Brendan Sasso 1, Pandora 1, Roger Wicker 1, Pendulum 1, Gautham Nagesh 1,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  CSPAN    The Communicators    News/Business. People who  
   shape the digital future.  

    January 7, 2013
    8:00 - 8:30pm EST  

8:00pm
>> with a 113th congress convening this month, we thought we would take this opportunity to look at the legislative agenda and the policy agenda. joining us our three wonderful reporters that cover technology politics. gautham nagesh, , what dc is the security issues? >> as many would have predicted, they remain far apart in the post to any kind of security standard. that being said, the administration has threatened to implement a lot of fair legislation of the executive order. which includes negotiating leverage, and we also have reports that president obama issued a secret directive that address some of the
8:01pm
administration and the private sector. regardless, we will see more action on cybersecurity coming out. it is still a difficult process. >> host: we go back to the secret directive. >> guest: it's very difficult to say.
8:02pm
neutrality could be a big issue in the next year. they are considering the ftc's rules and accept the sec back to square one, whether it's a push in congress to enact a law, a possibility that i don't see the house republicans going for. >> host: tuesday the court making a decision and having neutrality on the. >> guest: if they uphold the rule, then they will be safe and i will be the standard now.
8:03pm
whether the sec has the power regulate the services of the 21st century. >> host: another guess that we have today is eliza krigman. >> guest: thank you for having me on the show. i would agree with brendan sasso. when you look at regulating the internet, which is of course the most important platform and and
8:04pm
communications right now, i think the conventional wisdom is that the court is likely to strike down supporters of the rules aren't comfortable with the fact that the commission does not use the authority under the communications act. another thing to consider about this issue is will google provide the same rule as corporate rabbis, if you will, to guide this issue forward.
8:05pm
he was the top issue for them. >> host: there was talk of rewriting the telecom act of the 1990s. what do you think about this? >> guest: there has been a lot of talk for about a decade.
8:06pm
i think some members are more inclined to try and just deal with specific issues and think it might be too difficult at this point in time. one has to remember that that law came here by 1934. it was kind of digging into all of the past. and i think that is a big thing that we have to talk about. roger wicker is likely to become the ranking member of the
8:07pm
communications and internet pendulum. all of those things have yet to be solidified. >> guest: i think the broader communications is that we are any period of great destruction. things like netflix, apple, the itunes store, it is not yet clear how consumers will get their content when all available options are there.
8:08pm
it needs more time to shake out before they try to set these boundaries. >> guest: they keep saying, the federal trade commission, they keep saying that they will get it done by the end of the year. but it is now driving. it seemed like and look like the federal trade commission like the federal trade commission was going to walk away without taking any aggressive action. it seems like the federal trade commission sort of decides that well, maybe, google have to play ball with the europeans.
8:09pm
maybe we can extract similar concessions and also the state attorney general will look into it and they are upset and we are pushing the ftc to be more aggressive. >> host: what do you think, eliza krigman. >> guest: i think it's a big issue to implement these options. the ftc has its sleeves rolled up. there are some hot button issues on that. the power of wi-fi and other amazing devices that they have come up with all the time. there is a real risk between
8:10pm
republican lawmakers and the sec over the appropriate way to create this. we will be watching closely to see how this formulate a policy to allow smaller players to get through the action. >> guest: on the topic of google antitrust, that is the most watched by the commercial sector
8:11pm
issue. it is really going to set the tone. essentially google is offering
8:12pm
rules and they will become isolated and it will put barriers for smaller companies. if they were to find some sort of cases of action as was mentioned, what we saw, i think, was a very specific campaign by google. i think an outreach on both sides of the aisle really having impact on how regulators see the core questions. at the same time we saw that beer on the regulators part a lot of things have changed though. t-mobile has been offering
8:13pm
lower-cost plans. and sprint is also in the process of acquiring large and wealthy japanese firms that have the financial resources to compete with at&t. these things tend to take longer than what we thought. >> largely i don't think there are many concerns about it. they are a japanese country, and i think that i have not heard an
8:14pm
interesting point. those are the kinds of things that i rely upon. >> host: it sort of seemed like sprint wage an all-out campaign. so with at&t can cause some headaches for sprint, a foreign company will gain control of the services. and i'm sure they will see that opportunity. t-mobile is owned by a foreign company. it's not unnatural for that to happen. >> host: when it comes to the spectrum and the big issue, whether congress will push to free up federal agencies and we haven't even held the options of tv broadcasts spectrum as of
8:15pm
yet. we still need more than a lot of the spectrum is currently used by the defense department and other federal users. they are wondering if congress will force them to move. >> the defense committee, i believe, comes out to make a public remarks about working with the defense department and i think that was noteworthy because previously it has been an issue just as the commerce committee have dealt with. and it is a sign that they are making a more comprehensive push to have the department find ways that they can relinquish to the private sector. >> host: go ahead.
8:16pm
>> guest: i think the we are offering a defense authorization bill amendment in december. i am not certain about that, but a spectrum that is currently held by the defense department. he has shown that that is a priority for him. the wireless companies were probably correct in that the spectrum will not be saved by this coming option. it is not really in line with the growing appetite for mobile data consumption and all those sorts of things. so governments coming up with a new plan, some talk about sharing spectrums between the wireless companies in other fashions. we will probably see more discussion of that. >> host: you have mentioned some of the new leadership in the
8:17pm
senate. in the 113th congress, who are some of the new leaders in the house we should keep an eye on? >> i think a lot of the people are going to be on the committee that we have. smith is going to be moving to the science and space technology program he was involved whether they will try to pick up some sort of new copyright enforcement has yet to be seen. >> host: did you see a policy coming forward again? >> whether there will be some sort of effort to have some kind of copyright law mind, i think it is a possibility. but i think a lot of lawmakers were a little frightened by the
8:18pm
backlash for that. i think there is a movie industry and the recording industry is looking for smaller issues that they can push. >> host: lee terry is taking over for cliff stearns. on the energy and commerce committee, is that right? >> no, he is taking over the position that mary bono mack had and he will be the vice chair of the commerce committee. it will be interesting to see how and whether she tries to assert her authority. she has actually told me that she is interested in tackling something related to piracy. but i would agree that it's very unlikely.
8:19pm
all members are extremely wary of trying to enact laws of technology that they perhaps have an expertise on. and that they don't understand all the ramifications. and i think with various lobbyists, nobody is interested in having a repeat of that. >> what about potential changes? >> guest: that is the big question. there was widespread speculation
8:20pm
however, those plans have been placed on hold. no one knows what to think. his legacy is very uncertain at this place. it has passed that many of the it, the allies have either abandoned the commission in some fashion or arguing that they didn't go far enough in the rules that they implemented. i would not be surprised if the rules were shot down to be reclassified still. but regardless, i think what he chooses to do, it will really
8:21pm
define the president's legacy. it will be a huge political fight. it is sort of a small issue and they would now have the power to regulate it in a way that the old telephone companies set prices here and it is much more controlled and i think lawmakers would freak out over it in
8:22pm
creating parity like pandora and they currently pay a higher rate and in a few years of 2014, when independent processes have been reviewing the rate again. they have to try to push this legislation forward, and they have had those republicans and democrats we are kind of in the
8:23pm
beginning phase of the lobbying. more members are going to get involved and they are not just going to go to drafting legislation. >> host: senator rockefeller introduced following recount of the violent videogame review. >> guest: i could see his bill passing. he introduced a bill that was just requiring a study of effects in violence in video games and tv and other media. i could see that being something. whether there is actually any action on it, i think it is less likely. whether any action would stand up in the courts, the supreme court had a decision in 2011 were they struck down california that minors under 18 years old could not buy a certain
8:24pm
violence. i am not sure what congress could do in terms of regulations of the media. >> host: we have three minutes left in the taping of "communicators." >> guest: while privacy will continue to be the largest issue for most internet companies, the likelihood of congress doing anything is very small. we have seen the federal trade commission take the lead some say they are quite onerous.
8:25pm
we will see the ministry of action, and the ftc implementing privacy policies and watching them more. the companies will have to keep to their word essentially on privacy. as we have seen in countries like facebook and instagram, when they change their work, there are enough people using them. a lot of them are fairly savvy. and they pick up on these changes and we see a public backlash and then we see companies often have to buckle. that has moved much quicker than any regulations have. now i think it will be sad status quo. there will be calls to action afterwards and we will see the market correct itself. i really don't think washington moves quickly enough as far as it's concerned there is this voluntary talk, the advertising
8:26pm
industry comes to the table, and not totally fall apart. the lawmakers and regulators say that all of last year, well, we're going to give the industry a chance. but now that has failed. and there needs to be an effort to create an option where people can opt out of tracking this. >> host: do you agree. >> guest: yes, i do agree. it is an area that is very difficult to legislate. despite the fact that there is so much concern about it and a lot of members feel that the best thing they can do is keep the pressure on the industry and continue to make it a high profile issue so that companies have to be on guard about this. and they need to push really hard for transparency measures. there are so many steps to that. you don't have to have an eight page agreement that is not easy for one to understand.
8:27pm
>> host: unfortunately we are out of time. the editor of the technology executive briefing for congressional quarterly. thank you all very much. >> guest: thank you for having us be mapped. >> guest: think you. >> coming up on c-span2, the federal budget. and defense spending. in a report on immigration spending in the united states. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, we will focus on president obama's announcement of the nominees we have trained
8:28pm
all a very, the writer for congressional quarterly. and lieutenant colonel with the center of security to talk about relations between the u.s. and afghanistan and president hamed karzai and his visit to washington this week. "washington journal" is live on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> now a discussion about the special effects of defense cuts on national security. topics include poetry readiness from a potential job losses. paul wolfowitz is going to participate in this two-hour event hosted by the brookings institution. [inaudible conversations]
8:29pm
>> good morning, everyone. welcome to brookings. i am michael o'hanlon. i welcome you here to u.s. defense strategy and the defense budget. we are honored to have robert hale here to give the keynote address to begin things. just a quick note on the agenda, after bob has spoken, i will come up and we can have some questions again, thank you all for being here. let me say a brief word about bob